Legal Opinion

State v. Brown

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided March 16, 2004No. 23610PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PICKARD, J.

{1} This case is a sequel to Subin v. Ulmer, 2001-NMCA-105, 131 N.M. 350, 36 P.3d 441. We decided in that case that a district court has no authority to order the Public Defender Department (Department) to pay expert witness fees for an indigent defendant who is represented by counsel paid for by family members. The question we must answer in this case is whether that rule applies equally to expert witness fees paid from unspecified state funds where counsel represents the indigent defendant pro bono for no fee. Based on our decision in Subin, the district court concluded…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Moore v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  2. State v. Wacey C.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. State v. BrownNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State v. BrownNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API